User talk:DAde

We can't unblock you at this time, because you haven't given us the information we need to even look into your block. I'm removing your unblock request because there's nothing we can do without this information. If you still want to be unblocked, feel free to add the tag back to this page, and be sure to include the message you saw when you tried to edit, including the IP address.  This is what the message looks like. Without that information, we can't help you. ➨  ЯEDVERS  17:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. BhaiSaab talk 22:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I suggest you do not reinsert that passage again. It is not very important or that relevant to be on the Islam page. Please use the talk page if you think I am incorrect. Thanks. BhaiSaab talk 16:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You may think it's important, but please consider it's relevancy. Thanks. BhaiSaab talk 18:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Intolerant Quran verses
I've added the "prod" template to the article Intolerant Quran verses, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:Intolerant Quran verses. If you remove the dated prod template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Oldelpaso 14:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that you contested the deletion of this article. I'm of the opinion that it doesn't conform to Wikipedia's standards regarding the neutral point of view. I've listed the article as a possible candidate for deletion. Please visit that link to contribute to the discussion. Thank you. Joyous! | Talk 16:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
I suggest you read WP:NPOV before you proceed any further. BhaiSaab talk 16:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Related Portals
Please don't create articles that consist of nothing but redirects or external links. NawlinWiki 14:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Note
Your change to the page Islam was determined to be unhelpful, and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. Thanks.  ITAQALLAH  16:10, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Islam. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. BhaiSaab talk 17:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Islamic extremist terrorism
Please discuss your edits on the talk page. It is unclear why you insist on including this lengthy list of quotations. --Lee Hunter 17:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. -- Szvest 16:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Solution for NPOV constraints
DAde, I see you're engaged in these endless revert wars in the religious articles. You'll like wikiislam.com where you can have your say and never have it censored for political correctness. You'll like this page specially, where you can mention as many Quranic verses and hadiths as you like. Pass it on to your friends as well.--Matt57 01:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Counter-Jihad Education Taskforce
This is to advise you that the project page you created above is being considered for deletion in accord with wikipedia policy. Please feel free to follow the links on the project page or go directly to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Counter-Jihad Education Taskforce to participate in the discussion. Thank you. Badbilltucker 23:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding reversions made on November 4 2006 to Islamic extremist terrorism
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. The duration of the block is 24 hours.

Too much reverting.

William M. Connolley 18:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The quotes
DAde, you have tried to insert the quotes into many articles despite guidelines regarding summary style articles and the consensus of many editors which do not approve of your insertions. If you continue to do this, I will file a request for comment from outside editors to see what they think of your actions. Please desist, as you have attempted to do this over 50 times and have always been reverted back. I suggest you find something to contribute to in a constructive manner. Thanks. BhaiSaab talk 20:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for 3RR violation
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. The duration of the block is 24 hours. --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 21:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Be Constructive
Why don't you channel your energies more productively, by adding well-sourced material (Robert Spencer, Bat Ye'or, Ibn Warraq, etc) to the articles like Criticism of the Quran, Criticism of Islam, and Criticism of Muhammad? Arrow740 16:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked due to continuous tendentious editing. I see no evidence of anything other than disruption and argumentation from you, spilling over into article space as a series of inappropriate edits advocating your views. Numerous editors have asked you to stop it, and several times you have been blocked. You have chosen to ignore this. I see no reason why you should continue to be allowed to waste the time of the community. You may appeal this block by adding unblock to this talk page or by request to the arbitration committee. Please be aware that incivility is likely to weaken any attempt to appeal the block. Guy (Help!) 23:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)